VT.

 

LB
1576

V
.033
1992

IGSL

six"
‘3...

Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE) - ,

INSTITUTE OF GOVERNMENTAL

UCB To I g If: STUD? " LIEQARY
L C JAN 26 2017
l

IMPLEMENTING CALIFORNIA'S
LANGUAGE ARTS CURRICULUM
FRAMEWORK

by Allan Odden and Nancy Kotowski

This policy brief is based on a USC study
directed by Allan Odden, David Marsh, and Nancy
K otowski . The findings are reported in Nancy
Kotowski’s doctoral dissertation, '

r -
Frammgrk, University of Southern California. The
following California school administrators and former
USC doctoral students conducted the district and
school case studies: Rod Buchignani, Ellen Curtin,
Cecilia Fernandez, Constance F ish, Barbara F orcier,
Judith F ogel, Ruben Hernandez, Denise Hexom,
Mary McCullough, Carol Leighty, Laurie Love,
S teve Lowder, Shirley Peterson and Jack Stokes.

A comer stone of California's education
reform strategy is the creation of a series of high
quality curriculum frameworks designed to
upgrade K— 12 education in the state. The
frameworks raise expectations of students‘
knowledge and understanding of language arts,
mathematics, science, and history/social science.
They focus on learning for understanding, and
thinking, problem solving, and using knowledge
in practical, real-life situations. More
specifically, the goals of the frameworks are to
introduce a curriculum which can be used for all
students and produce students who:

- Know how to learn

- Can use knowledge to analyze issues and
solve problems, and

- Can apply that knowledge to actual
problems of the economy and society.

 

A ‘ llenD
UNNERQTY Oi- (JALn uanA

o. 4 November 1992

English-Language Arts Curriculum
Framework

California's English-Language Arts
Curriculum Frame work emphasizes the use of
literature, rather than textbooks, to expose
students to language arts. Its basic premise is
that students can best learn to read and write
through experience - by actually reading and
writing. It proposes that students read real
literature - books, stories, and poems - rather
than traditional reading books. Its tenets are that
language arts should:

0 Be literature based,

- Emphasize writing and language
developments skills, and

- Integrate reading, Writing, listening and
spealcing, and integrate language arts with
other subjects.

Implementing the frameworks requires
fundamental changes in classroom practice.
From the standard practice of presenting
curriculum as fragmented and isolated bits of
knowledge, teachers must instead make students
draw upon and advance their understandings of
both content and skills. Valid solutions are not
unique and can vary widely. To engage in this
fundamentally different classroom discourse,
most teacher need deeper understandings of the
content areas, a wide range of new pedagogical
strategies, and more complex strategies for
organizing classrooms and schools

In 1991, USC conducted a study of 14

PACE is a non—partisan university-based education
research center, directed by James W. Guthrie,
UC Berkeley; Michael W. Kirst, Stanford University;
and Allan R. Odden, USC. Julia E. Koppich,
UC Berkeley, is the Deputy Director.

California school districts and elementary schools
to assess the extent to which teacher were
implementing the language arts curriculum
framework, and to determine what factors the

 

 

 

Implementing California 's Language Arts Curriculum Framework

teachers believe are impeding or facilitating its
implementation. The study examined teachers'
understudying of the frameworks, the degree of
implementation, and factors affecting the
implementation process.

Teachers' Understanding of the
Frameworks

Teacher perceptions of the language arts
curriculum frame work showed that they had a
good understanding of the frameworks' purpose
and approach. Teachers perceived that the
language arts framework is an experiential
program which suggests a fundamental change
from the traditional roles in the teaching-learning
process. Within the framework, the teacher
seeks to evoke students' interest in reading and
writing and connects them with it personally.
Students are provided with opportunities to
respond to what is read. Open-ended questions
are used to connect students with the text and to
bring them beyond it, and students are given
opportunities to construct their own meanings
from the text.

Teachers also recognized that the language
arts framework is a core program for all with
skills taught in meaningful contexts. In other
words, every child, regardless of ability or
conditions, is provided the same core language
arts program with is literature-based, meaning-
centered, challenging, and draws on students'
experiences.

The frame work also involved thematic
integration : teachers emphasize language arts
skills in all content areas, and use thematic units
to integrate reading, writing, listening and
speaking.

Teachers also characterized the framework as
developing a comprehensive, coherent language
arts program which links language arts
curriculum standards with new, high quality
instructional materials, new forms of assessment
linked closely to those standards, and active
involvement of parents with regard to language
use and reading at home.

Teachers also felt that the framework '
involved phonics which is taught in meamngful

contexts in the early grades and focus on the
most important letter-to—sound relationships.

Degree of Implementation

Despite teachers' thorough understanding of
the frameworks, in the districts and schools
studied, the English-Language Arts frameworks
were not fully implemented at the classroom
level. The first three of the five components
described above were implemented to a moderate
degree, with mixed results for the other two.

Experiential langgage arts instruction.
Teachers wanted to offer students a rich,

experiential language arts program, but
implemented this only moderately in their
classrooms. Teachers provided students with
daily opportunities to read on their own and to
hear good literature read to them. Teachers
believed that they evoked students' interest in
reading materials and connected students
personally with the materials. But while 84
percent of teacher believed they used open-ended
questioning techniques to a high degree, only 67
percent said that such approaches were the center
of communicative interaction in their classrooms.

Core program for all students with skills

taught in meaningful contexts. Most teachers
believed they were offering all their students the

same core, literature-based, meaning-centered
language arts program to a moderately high
degree. Then probed regarding specific aspects
of teaching skills in context, however, only 26
percent were implementing this approach at a
moderate level.

Thematic integration. Most teachers wanted
to use integrative language arts processes in all
subject areas. However, only two-thirds
indicated they used these processes to a high
degree. Although most teachers felt they were
implementing the "basics" of the integrated
instructional approach to a high degree, the
overall results suggest that the scope of
possibilities of thematic integration have not yet
been tapped.

Mixed results were found regarding two
dimensions of the framework - the
comprehensiveness and coherence of the

Implementing California's Language Arts Curriculum Framework

language arts program being implemented, and
the issue of phonics instruction.

Comprehensive, coherent language arts
program. The language arts frame works require

that students have access to literature. However,
mixed results were found regarding the supply of
literary works needed to teach the program to all
students, especially limited-English—proficient
students. Some teachers and students had
sufficient, new materials while other did not.
Regarding assessment, 72 percent of teachers
indicated that they used alternative forms of
testing student, including written and oral work,
to a high degree, while others did not. Seventy-
Two percent of teachers indicated that they used
alternative forms of testing student, including
written and oral work, to a high degree, while 22
percent indicated moderate degree, and six
percent indicated a low degree of use. Sixty—five
percent of teachers believed they were currently
covering the full range of the goals of the
language arts program and aligning assessment
with what students were expected to learn.
Twenty-three percent indicated a moderate degree
and nine percent a low degree of alignment at the
present time. Thus, teachers wanted to link
assessment strategies more to new forms of
instruction, but full implementation of this
objective was just beginning.

Phonigs. About half of the teachers indicated
that they implemented the frameworks' approach
to phonics to a high degree and 24 percent to a
moderate degree. However, 18-23 percent of
the teachers indicated a low degree of
implementation, which means they were using a
phonics, not a literature-based, approach to teach
language arts. This finding conflicts with the
finding that most teachers said they were teaching
skills in meaningful contexts, not the typical
phonics approach. It suggests that teacher
probably were grafting the new skills-in-context
approach onto the traditional phonics approach,
this providing at best only partial implementation
of the framework. This mixed pattern has been
found on other studies of California's curriculum
reform as well (Cohen, 1991).

Factors Affecting Implementation

As California initiated its nation-leading
curriculum reform efforts in the mid-1980s,
consensus began to emerge about the key
elements of the local curriculum change process.
The following factors found to be significantly
related to effective curriculum change:

1. Creation of ambitious, credible and sound
visions of educational change such as those
embodied in the California curriculum
frameworks.

2. An ambitious antecedent implementation
phase in which key individuals learn more about
the new curriculum vision and become competent
in using small curriculum units to implement that
vision.

3. District and site administrator knowledge
and commitment to the curriculum change effort
throughout the entire implementation process
from initiation through full implementation.

4. Ambitious training and technical
assistance during adoption, but particularly
throughout the entire implementation process,
which includes specific assistance in individual
teachers' classrooms

5. Use of teachers as knowledgeable leaders
throughout the implementation process.

6. Long-run commitment to full and
complete implementation, i.e., staying power.

7. Teacher mastery of the required content
material and pedagogical practices.

8. Emergence of teacher commitment to the
new curriculum program, which often occurred
after more than one year of actively working to
change practices in the teacher's own classroom.

The USC study identified 12 factors which
affect the implementation-change process for the
schools and districts studied, several of which
are included in the factors listed above. Overall,
teachers who perceived a higher degree of
implementation also experienced a higher level of

Implementing California's Language Arts Curriculum Framework

support for their English-Language Arts
framework implementation efforts from:

School site leadership. Teachers in this
study perceived the implementation progress had
been maintained at their sites through school
leadership that kept language arts reform a high
priority. Teachers gave very high marks to their
school leaders for having he knowledge and
expertise needed to support program»:
implementation efforts.

District leaders' knowledge and Exp_ertise.
Although not as high as school leaders, teachers

also gave district leaders high marks for
implementation. Teachers believed that
knowledgeable and expert leaders at both the
school and district are key to the curriculum
change process.

Fidelity to full implementation. Overall,
teachers felt pressure to fully implement and not

"down-size" the program. The findings suggest
that fidelity to full implementation was the
message.

Masteg of new practice, student outcomes,
and teacher effort. As the literature suggests,

teachers' perceptions of student outcomes are
linked to the amount of effort the teachers are
expending to implement the new frameworks.
Teacher confidence in their professional practice
and student achievement are also very highly
correlated (Rosenhotz, 1985). Seventy-three
percent of teachers reported that their language
arts instructional knowledge, skills, and practices
were significantly improved; 90 percent had
observed positive outcomes for students. As a
result, nearly three-fourths were willing to exert
the effort to get the program fully implemented.

Pressure to fully implement the proggm.
Ongoing assistance and pressure to continue

implementation is critical for effective
implementation (Huberman & Miles, 1984).
After adoption, 69 percent of teachers perceived
there had been continued district pressure for full
implementation to a high degree. Eighty-six
percent believe their district has kept attention
focused on the new program as a high priority.

District-school liaison. A strong district-
school connection was generally evident in the
districts an schools studied, including open
communication between school and district staff
on implementation issues, teacher influence over
implementation activities, and continuous district
support for language arts implementation
activities.

Teachers rated other factors that support
implementation only moderately strong or weak
in the schools studied.

Encouragement and recogpition. Firestone
(1989) found that providing incentives, such as

encouragement and recognition, helped the
implementation process by compensating for the
personal costs involved in acquiring new
knowledge, skills, and practices. The findings
indicated a low degree of district encouragement
and mixed results at the school level.

Time and training oppprtunities. Training,
ongoing assistance and collaboration are the sine
qua non of effective cuniculum change
(Huberman & Miles, 1984; Fullan, 1991;
McLaughlin, 1991; Odden, 1991). Only half the
teachers felt training opportunities provided by
the school were well targeted to help them
acquire the knowledge, skills, and practices
needed to fully implement the new language arts
program. After receiving inservice training, only
34 percent of teachers indicated follow-up
assistance was highly helpful; 42 percent felt it
we not. Only 41 percent of the teachers in this
study believed they had sufficient time for
ongoing training. Further, only 21 percent of
teacher believed they had sufficient time to
collabOrate with colleagues regarding the
program, share ideas, and plan. Marsh and
Odden's (1991) earlier study of implementation
of the California mathematics and science
frameworks found that integration and
coordination of program issues, problems, and
activities occurred through collegial interaction,
especially among the teacher experts.
Schoolwide consultation was the norm. In
contract, these factors were not found to be
operating among the teachers in this study.

Adminismtive monitoring. Previous

research found that monitoring of the

Implementing California's language Arts Curriculum Framework

implementation process supported full curriculum
reform: needs and problems are anticipated, and
the new program is buffered from outside
interference. In this study, district leaders
received a moderately low rating regarding their
effectiveness in remedying implementation needs
and problems that arose. Only 20 percent of
teachers rated district leaders‘ handing of
implementation needs and problems as high.
School leaders scored higher, but monitoring and
effective response was not rated a strong feature
of the implementation processes studied.

Teacher workload and prom commitment.
Local capacity and motivation to embrace policy

objectives is essential to generate the effort and ,
energy needed for implementing and sustaining a
successful project (McLaughlin, 1991).
Firestone (1989) found that one leadership
function supporting effective implementation was
avoiding work overload for teachers and
maintaining an even flow in the implementation
process. Low marks were given to school and
district leaders for recognizing and effectively
addressing teachers' work overload. But despite
the workload, more than half of the teachers felt a
high degree of ownership of the new program,
suggesting teachers are working hard for what
they believe is good instructional practice.

Instructional materials and facilities.
Adequate materials is one factor enabling
changes in teaching practice; providing a
sufficient literary works and library books, key
to the new language arts approach, were in
insufficient supply in the majority of districts and
schools.

onsisnc men n th hl
level, The findings suggest that there was strong
communication among school staff, and there
was a moderate to high degree of congruence of
the new program with teachers' preferred
teaching goals. However, lower marks were
given for schools' effective handling of
implementation needs and problems that arise.

The USC study found substantial movement
toward changing language arts content and
instruction, but also that further change was
needed for complete implementation. These
findings fit with other studies of the

implementation of the new California curriculum
frameworks. Additional research shows that a
variety of teacher networks are perhaps the most
powerful strategies for developing teacher
capacity for fully implementing these visions of
elementary and secondary school curriculum
(Adams, 1992, Liberman & McLaughlin, 1992).
Robust networks however, are costly. Unless
more resources are devoted to professional
capacity development, activities now feeling the
brunt of the budget cutting knife, California's
hopes embodied in the curriculum frameworks
are less likely to be realized.

Policy Implication and Recommendations

The findings from this and other related
studies on curriculum reform suggest the
following policy implications:

1. California should continue to support its
new curriculum frameworks. The are viewed
locally as professional visions of what the
elementary and secondary curriculum program
should be. Teachers are willing to work hard to
have them become the program in all schools.

2. More resources need to be provided to
support opportunities for teachers to develop the
professional expertise needed to implement the
frame works fully. Teachers are more than
willing to participate in such activities but they
are in short supply. The California subject matter
projects need to be fully funded and expended.
Addiu'onal resources also need to be invested in
books, other literary materials and fully equipped
libraries.

3. The state should continue as a high yield
investment its many capacity building programs,
such as School Improvement, Mentor Teachers,
Staff Development, and 1274 Program.

4. Additional resources also need to be
invested in books and other literary materials and
fully equipped libraries.

5. District and school leaders must become
both knowledgeable about the substance of the
new curriculum frameworks and provide
consistent, long-term support for activities
designed to get them completely implemented in

Implementing California's Language Arts Curriculum Framework

classrooms. The state could consider including
such knowledge and expertise in administrative
credentialling standards.

6. Finally, the implementation problem is not
the one conventionally supposed -- that
implementation will not happen because the
frameworks are "top-down" entities and meet
teacher resistance at the local level. On the
contrary, teachers strongly embrace the new
California curriculum frameworks and believe
they represent professional understanding of
content area curriculum standards. Further, most
teachers want to fully implement these
frameworks in their classrooms.

The implementation problem is a learning
problem. The issue is how to structure a set of
activities or strategies that can engage teachers in
the process of constructing a new set of
professional practices that are required by these
frameworks. Traditional staff development is
insufficient for this task (Adams, 1992; Cohen,
1992; Lieberman & McLaughlin, 1992; Little, et
a1., 1987). What is needed is a strategy that
allows teachers to work together collegially
across schools to develop, try out, and perfect
the classroom instructional strategies that will
engage students' in the process of constructing
content-based knowledge envisioned in these
frameworks. The California subject matter
projects are a step in the direction of these
strategies; they probably need to be more
ambitious, more numerous, and a supported
more generously.

Allan Odden is a Professor of Education at
the University of Southern California, Co-
Director of PACE, and Director of the Center for
Research in Education Finance at USC. Nancy
Kotowski is Curriculum Coordinator for the
Monterey County Office of Education and
formerly a research assistant at USC.

References

Adams, J. (1992). Poliey Imolemeotaa’on
thmogh Teaeher Professional Networks: The Case of
Math A in Califomia. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Stanford Univ., Palo Alto, CA.

Cohen, D. (1991). Revolution in One
Classroom. In S. Fuhrman and B. Malen (Eds).
The Polig'os of Corrieulum and Testing (pp. 103-
124). Philadelphia: Palmer Press.

Crandall, D. & Associates. (1982). BEBE.

Polieies ago flaQLiQQs‘. The Chain of Sohool
Imorovemeot. Andover, MA: The Network.

Firestone, W. (1989). Using Reform:
Conceptualizing District Initiative. Educational
Evaluation ago Eoliey Analysis, 11(2), 151-164.

Fullan, M. (1982). The Meaning of Eouoaa'onal
Qaage. NY: Teachers College Press.

Fullan, M. (1985). Change Processes and
Strategies at the Local Level. The Elemenlag

Mal. 85(30). 391-422.

Fullan, M. (1991). The New Meaning of
Wm. NY: Teachers College Press.

Huberman, M. & M. Miles (1984). mm
HILSLIQSE. New York: Plenum.

Kotowski, N. (1992). 113W
Ewes/org. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Southern California, Los Angeles,CA.

Lieberman, A. & M. McLaughlin. (1992).
Teacher Networks. We,

Little, J.W., W. Gerritz, D. Stern, M. _Kirst & D

Marsh- (1987). SEWE-
Berkeley, CA: PACE.

WW... adamant“... \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Marsh, D. & A. Odden. (1991).

Implementation of the California Mathematics and
Science Curriculum Frameworks. In A. Odden (Ed).

inPl Iml (pp. 219-240).

Albany: State University offI New York Press.

McLaughlin, M. (1991). The Rand Change

Agent Study: Ten Years Later. In A.

Educag‘gn Pglicy Implementatin an .

University of New York Press.

Odden (Ed)
Albany: State

EYLIBRARIES

“H“ W

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Odden. A. (1991). Win!
Imflgmemafign. Albany: State University of New
York Press.

Rosenholtz S I (1989) W
W New York

Longman.

The following policy briefs will be available from PACE at a cost of $5.00 each, prepaid. Please make
checkspayable to the Regents of the University of California. Send your requests to PACE, School of
Education, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720. For a complete list of PACE publications, call
the PACE office at (510) 642-7223 or (510) 643-7349.

The Efi‘ects of State Control on School Finance in California, by Larry Picus (Winter 1991)
California School Finance in the ’90s, by Allan Odden (Winter 1991—92)

School-linked Services, by Michael Kirst (Winter 1991—92)

Nationwide Influences on California Education Policy, by Michael Kirst (Winter 1991—92)
Vocational Education: Entering the Rq‘orm Era, by Gerald Hayward (Winter 1991—92)
Student Assessment, by Richard Shavelson (Winter 1991—92)

Education Reform and Labor-Management Relations, by Julia Koppich (Spring 1992)
Accountability, by James Guthrie (Spring 1992)

Decentralized Management, by Gerald Hayward and Julia Koppich (Spring 1992)
Education Reform and the New School Finance, by Allan Odden (Spring 1992)

 

Policy Analysis for California Education Non—Profit Org.
School of Education US. Postage
3659 Tolman Hall PAID

University of California Berkeley, CA

Berkeley, CA 94720 Permit No.1